[QUOTE=supersteeler;545896]I agree, remember when Hines was going to hold out but came to camp? By coming to camp he had a better shot of getting a deal done and he did get a nice deal. Wallace was afraid of getting injured while not having the big contract in place yet I guess, but this is all on him.
He had the opportunity and blew it, the Steelers don't cave in when are these players going to learn that.[/QUOTE]

Wallace didn't blow anything by himself. Maybe the Steelers blew it too because they didn't offer Wallace enough up front money? It's not all on Wallace. If only we knew what the Steelers offered Wallace. If they offered Wallace the same deal as Brown I can understand why Wallace wanted a deal with more upfront money. As a result not getting a deal done, the Steelers will probably lose their most explosive play maker.

Players can care less if and when the Steelers decide to cave. There are 31 other teams in the league that can pay them.

01-21-2013, 09:59 AM

Oviedo

[QUOTE=BURGH86STEEL;545897]Wallace didn't blow anything by himself. Maybe the Steelers blew it too because they didn't offer Wallace enough up front money? It's not all on Wallace. If only we knew what the Steelers offered Wallace. If they offered Wallace the same deal as Brown I can understand why Wallace wanted a deal with more upfront money. As a result not getting a deal done, the Steelers will probably lose their most explosive play maker.

Players can care less if and when the Steelers decide to cave. There are 31 other teams in the league that can pay them.[/QUOTE]

I think the Steelers' front office and coaches are far less worried about losing Wallace than his fans are. If they really cared they would find a way to make it work but they won't make that extra effort for a player who doesn't seem to care about being here. I think they understand that Wallace has many flaws as a WR and one strength...his speed. One injury and that speed could be gone which is logically why the Steelers balked at a whole lot of upfront money. If Wallace "loses a step" its not like he has other WR strengths he can rely on if he would ever have to do anything except run "go routes"

01-21-2013, 10:09 AM

Chadman

And we still argue Wallace vs Brown, and not the point of the article which is that the Steelers over-reacted to Wallace rejecting their contract offer.

Brown, regardless of being an inferior or superior WR to Mike Wallace, was scheduled to be a RFA in 2013.

Restricted Free Agent.

If the Steelers had decided to offer Brown the highest tender- they'd have him under contract in 2013 for $2.879m. And if another team wanted him, they'd have to pony up a 1st round pick to get him. They could sign Sanders to his original round tender amount & pay him $1.323m. That's both WR's signed for a tick under $3.2m in 2013.

But the Steelers didn't do that, did they? They extended Brown to a $42m contract 2 days after Wallace rejected them. The result is that Antonio Brown will cost the Steelers $6.2m against the cap on his own in 2013. That doesn't include Sanders.

And the Steelers are near $20m over the cap as it is.

It was a BAD business decision, regardless of which WR is superior.

01-21-2013, 10:25 AM

Chadman

[QUOTE] If they offered Wallace the same deal as Brown I can understand why Wallace wanted a deal with more upfront money. As a result not getting a deal done, the Steelers will probably lose their most explosive play maker. [/QUOTE]

Without trying to rehash the whole Wallace/Brown argument- this is the sticking point for Chadman. It's been reported quite a few times now that the money offered to Brown was very similar to the money the Steelers had previously offered to Wallace.

At the time of the contract offer (Slapstick- before you go apopleptic, just remember that the contract was offered prior to 2012, not after- so last season's stats are irrelevant) Wallace had 3 very good years production on his resume. And while we all want to argue the "Top 10 Money" thing- stats will show that Wallace's agent had a point. Yes- the 2nd half of 2011 showed a significant dip in Wallace's production- won't argue that, and there could be several reasons for that which, for the sake of human sanity, we won't go back over.

Now, conversely, at the time of the contract offer, Antonio Brown had 1 year's worth of good prodution as a returner, and half a year's production as a WR.

If the value of the contract offer is a reward for previous achievement- how is it possibly fair that Wallace & Brown get offered similar money based on production? Wallace was far superior over the course of his career, and deserved a higher rate of pay than Brown. Brown got overpaid by an organisation more intent on making a point about contract holdouts, instead of smart business decisions.

In the end- Wallace is as good as gone now, and will be paid by someone else. Will he be as successful elsewhere? Who knows? But the Steelers, Chadman is sure, will be hoping to get more than sub-800 yards recieving for their $6.2m cap hit in 2013. Problem is, there is no historical evidence supporting this happening in Brown's career.

Here's hoping the Steelers got it right.

01-21-2013, 10:43 AM

Oviedo

[QUOTE=Chadman;545908]Without trying to rehash the whole Wallace/Brown argument- this is the sticking point for Chadman. It's been reported quite a few times now that the money offered to Brown was very similar to the money the Steelers had previously offered to Wallace.

At the time of the contract offer (Slapstick- before you go apopleptic, just remember that the contract was offered prior to 2012, not after- so last season's stats are irrelevant) Wallace had 3 very good years production on his resume. And while we all want to argue the "Top 10 Money" thing- stats will show that Wallace's agent had a point. Yes- the 2nd half of 2011 showed a significant dip in Wallace's production- won't argue that, and there could be several reasons for that which, for the sake of human sanity, we won't go back over.

Now, conversely, at the time of the contract offer, Antonio Brown had 1 year's worth of good prodution as a returner, and half a year's production as a WR.

If the value of the contract offer is a reward for previous achievement- how is it possibly fair that Wallace & Brown get offered similar money based on production? Wallace was far superior over the course of his career, and deserved a higher rate of pay than Brown. Brown got overpaid by an organisation more intent on making a point about contract holdouts, instead of smart business decisions.

In the end- Wallace is as good as gone now, and will be paid by someone else. Will he be as successful elsewhere? Who knows? But the Steelers, Chadman is sure, will be hoping to get more than sub-800 yards recieving for their $6.2m cap hit in 2013. Problem is, there is no historical evidence supporting this happening in Brown's career.

Here's hoping the Steelers got it right.[/QUOTE]

I think that you are narrowing the definition somewhat saying that "the value of the contract offer is a reward for previous achievement." It is a combination of both past production and the team's projection of that players future value to the team. To ignore that you think a player has a bigger upside is never part of the equation. IMO that is what happened with Wallace and Brown. The team saw that Brown potentially had a bigger upside than Wallace. Tomlin tried to make it a joke but he call Wallace a "one trick pony" for a very good reason.

01-21-2013, 01:41 PM

BURGH86STEEL

[QUOTE=Oviedo;545901]I think the Steelers' front office and coaches are far less worried about losing Wallace than his fans are. If they really cared they would find a way to make it work but they won't make that extra effort for a player who doesn't seem to care about being here. I think they understand that Wallace has many flaws as a WR and one strength...his speed. One injury and that speed could be gone which is logically why the Steelers balked at a whole lot of upfront money. If Wallace "loses a step" its not like he has other WR strengths he can rely on if he would ever have to do anything except run "go routes"[/QUOTE]
No point in worrying about who the team will lose. The team will move on and so will the player. It is what it is. Wallace probably wanted to be here but at the right price. I can't blame him for wanting a better deal the the one Brown received. Whether that deal was more upfront money or something else is still to be determined. I don't know the many flaws that you speak of in regard to Wallace? Wallace has improved as a route runner. He is still young enough to improve his overall game. At this point, Wallace has proven that he can produce and play at a high level. Even if Wallaces loses a step he will be faster then many of the WR's and DB's in the league. Wallace can run other routes besides go routes. However, the attention he draws and big play ability on go routes is where he will make his money.

One injury to any player can reduce that player's effectiveness and value. It's probably one reason why Wallace wanted more upfront money. I can't blame him. It's a smart business decision to get as much money as he can in his prime.

01-21-2013, 02:26 PM

SS Laser

I look at it this way Chadman. Brown got paid a bonus for 1k and 1k. He was the first to do it. Jersey's in the HOF. He made 2 BIG game saving catches I think. The football pinned to his helmet was sweet. And I think there was another. It was Browns clutch play and Wallace being greedy and not stepping up in the superbowl loss. Wallace is not clutch. Ward and Holmes were clutch also.